Blog 2 - Draft History of Lexington Market



Notes:
·       This is a draft addressing the history of the Lexington Market.  I was trying to get the basic narrative flow, realizing that it is a bit choppy and needs some more detail in places.   
·       I envision some kind of introductory paragraph explaining why the zine exists and why someone should read it.   This would include identifying some version of the basic question which I see as balancing the needs of the community against the economic/social interests of the city.
·       We haven’t discussed pictures – it would be nice to have at least one of the old market, with stalls etc.  There are some on the web but I don’t know the rules about using them or even how to get one into this piece.
·        I assume that the discussion of the plan will follow this section and I put a header as a suggestion.
·       As an editorial note, I was trying to use uppercase Market meaning the Lexington Market specifically and lowercase market to mean public market in general.  I was probably not totally consistent in this, but think we need a standard convention.
Liz Cusick


Lexington Market has been around a long time.

            The sign on the front of Lexington Market reads “since 1782” which is a little misleading.  The city got the land in 1782 from John Eager Howard but it was twenty-one years later, in 1803, that the first market building opened.  There has been a market building on the site ever since, although not always the same building.  It was not the first market built in Baltimore but it has lasted the longest. 
      In the 17oo and 1800’s, a city was responsible for making sure that its citizens had access to food.  Most large cities had public markets where farmers and other vendors sold food to urban residents under regulations to ensure fair trading and safe food.  The city dictated which days each market could be open; Lexington Market opened on Tuesday, Friday and Saturday.  Everyone in the city needed food and the markets were used by everyone – rich and poor, men and women, all races and ethnicities.  Markets were a place where everyone shopped.
     In 1800, the population of Baltimore was 26,514; 50 years later, in 1850, it was 169,054.  More people needed more food, so Baltimore built more markets for a total of 11.  Lexington Market expanded by building two more buildings.  All three were sheds —buildings with a roof but no outside walls.  That allowed vendors to set up stalls outside the cover of the roof so that more vendors could crowd into the space. 

Lexington Market has changed.

     Lexington Market is still here because it has changed as the city changed.    By the 1850’s, Baltimore grew so fast that many people could not easily get to one of the markets.   In these neighborhoods, green grocers started stores which offered fresh food bought from butchers or farmers.   Over the objections of vendors in the markets, the city allowed these stores to make sure that everyone had access to food.   Despite the growing competition, Lexington Market remained an important source of fresh food for Baltimore. 
      Baltimore continued to grow quickly.  By 1900, the population reached 508,957.  The city did not keep building new markets for the new parts of the city.  Instead green groceries and later supermarkets provided other choices for shoppers.  Improvements in transportation, refrigeration and food preservation meant that food for Baltimore could come from distant parts of the country, not just from local farmers selling in the market.  Food processing and distribution became big businesses.  Much of the responsibility for food provision moved from the public control of the city to the private, market economy.  Eventually this helped create unequal access to fresh food in the city, talked about today as the problem of food deserts.
     By 1900, Lexington Market was 100 years old and needed maintenance and repair.  There were debates through the first half of the twentieth century about whether the buildings should be improved or replaced with an enclosed market.   The vendors in the Market opposed rebuilding because it would be disruptive and change their financial arrangements with the city.   Improvements were made in 1908 including adding electricity to light the market and a new sign.  New issues were added to the old arguments.  An enclosed building would improve sanitation and a parking lot would help manage growing car traffic.  Vendors were happy to get refrigeration and wanted parking, but continued to resist efforts to change the financing of stalls.
     This stalemate was resolved in 1949 when Lexington Market burned down.   The fire was caused by an electric spark in the early morning.  Two men were in the Market unloading ice for a stall and quickly brought fire-fighters.  The main Market building was destroyed but the fire did not spread.   The city opened a temporary market quickly and in 1952 the current Lexington Market building opened.  The Arcade was added in 1982.

There are still public debates about Lexington Market.

     Although the debate about an enclosed market was settled, debates about the Lexington Market have continued.  One is about money – should the Market be self-sustaining?  Does the city have a financial responsibility for keeping the market going?  When the new Market opened in 1952, the city changed the financing arrangements with vendors.  Vendors no longer owned their stalls and had to pay more in rent for the space.  The building was financed by selling 25-year bonds, primarily to local banks.  However, while the Market continued to flourish and was able to pay its operating bills, it did not make enough to repay the bonds. 
     The second debate is about Lexington Market as part of the west downtown community.  Although the Market is used by people throughout the region, most of its customers come from the immediate neighborhood.  Questions about paying for continued improvements to the Market have become involved in planning for the neighborhood.   In the first half of the twentieth century, Baltimore’s downtown was a business center with a large shopping area anchored by four major department stores.  However, as suburbs grew, residents moved further from the market and shoppers went to suburban malls.   The neighborhood around the market became poorer and blacker.  Since the mid-century, Baltimore city government has struggled with a variety of plans for “revitalizing” the downtown area including how Lexington Market could play a part in attracting more affluent shoppers and residents back to the city.
     The city’s efforts have had some successes – the growing presence of University of Maryland institutions and creation of the Bromo-Seltzer Arts District – but have not yet produced the economic revival that planners hoped for.  The city has recently made public the newest plans for the Market.

What will Lexington Market be like in the future?


Sources:
“Against New Market: Two Hundred Dealers Hold An Enthusiastic Meeting.” Baltimore Sun, August 14, 1907.
Bucholz, H.E. “When Baltimore’s First Market House Was Built; It Stood at Gay And Baltimore Streets--History of The Markets.” Baltimore Sun, December 8, 1907.
Edward. “Lexington Market Was Opened 105 Years Ago; The History of One of the Most Famous Markets in the World.” Baltimore Sun, December 22, 1907.
Fant, Hamilton G. “From the People: Spare Lexington Market.” Baltimore Sun, May 22, 1907.
“Fire at Lexington Market Wipes Out Entire Section.” Baltimore Sun, March 25, 1949.
Gamble, Robert J. “The City That Eats: Food and Power in Baltimore’s Early Public Markets.” In Baltimore Revisited, by Nicole King and Kate Drabinski, forthcoming.
“Improvement of the Lexington Market.” Baltimore Sun, April 9, 1877.
Kimelman, Donal. “Bonds Due in 1979: Lexington Mart on Fiscal Brink.” Baltimore Sun, August 16, 1976.
“Large Crowd at Opening of Market.” Baltimore Sun, September 28, 1949.
Schultheis, Patricia. Baltimore’s Lexington Market. Images of America. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Pub, 2007.
Tangires, Helen. Public Markets and Civic Culture in Nineteenth-Century America. Creating the North American Landscape. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.

Comments

  1. Your goal of striving for a strong “narrative flow” in the history of the LM is exactly the direction we want to move. As I posted in my blog 1 comments, for publically engaged scholarship we want to really build narrative tension and use the skills of storytelling through vivid, clear, and engaging details. Get the dates but add in the people (quotes) and the narrative tension at the heart of the Market’s role as a complex and contradictory microcosm of the city. Think → a magazine article you would actually read over a scholarly article or dissertation. This is a skill I am still working on myself.

    I agree we need an introductory paragraph on the purpose and goals of the zine. Liz R. is working on that aspect. As it goes with intros, you write them in the beginning… and then go back and rewrite them over and over until the end (also know as the deadline). I see writing as a process of figuring something out. Writing is at least 80% editing. You write about the intro: “This would include identifying some version of the basic question which I see as balancing the needs of the community against the economic/social interests of the city.” In an ideal world, shouldn’t the needs of the community be the in the economic/social interests of the city? Yet we do not live in such a world. So, there’s a central tension of the Market, Baltimore, and cities in general. Very good theme to hone in on.

    Also, I want us to really unpack and complicate the notion of “community” as this always positive and warm thing. Community (especially ones concerned mainly with private property rights and economic interests) can be the basis of segregation, oppression, and a host of NIMBY social problems. Communities divide as much as they connect. There is no one community at the LM or in the westside of downtown.

    Okay… those are the general theoretical ideas. You have an excellent start to the story of the LM. I need to share my full research from the Afro with you to incorporate more perspectives on the LM… as the Sun presents a certain position from a point of power and a very white perspective, especially in the early to mid-twentieth century.

    I pasted your history draft in a google doc in our class folder where I will make editing suggestions in the text. Onward!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you that utilizing photos in the zine is definitely needed. As Nicole noted in her comment, this zine is more framed as being a magazine or news article rather than a scholarly piece or dissertation. Including photos in the zine, especially ones that put people in connection with the history in an easily digestible way, makes it much more appealing to read rather than a zine with just words filled in it. Baltimore Sun has a great database for archived photos from their news room, while its not the best for searching because of lack of reference tags, it can be used to find some gems: http://baltimoresun.imagefortress.com/home/about (at the time of this comment the site is unable to load because of too many users accessing it, hopefully it will clear up soon).

    Mentioning the democratic usage of the space in Lexington Market through history is incredibly valuable as we look at the shape it takes in the future. Your specific mention of how all demographics and classes in the city used the market during its inception is a great way to highlight that. I wonder if there are photos showing this during operating market hours we could include in the zine as well - showing how throughout history this has been a place welcome to all, and from there arguing we that need to still hold true to that vision during reconstruction. This could also be used as a talking point for how the city’s economic and social interests seem to be in conflict with the communities; delving into why there is a divide between these two positions could bring some light on who the city really wants this market to be “for” now.

    *Its also interesting that you note how the city made sure during expansion that all city residents had access to healthy food - I think that would be a great path to investigate in comparison to the construction of the city space now where in 2015 at least 1 in 4 city residents lives in an area without access to healthy food options.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 1 – Lexington Market in the Baltimore Sun

Blog 7: Waiting for the Zine and more history